About your Search

20120925
20121003
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)
out al-qaeda. >> hiding in libya. >> it was actually in a high level united nations meeting that hillary clinton for the first time today admitted that an al-qaeda linked group was involved. grps have launched a other kidnappings from northern mali working with other violent extremts to ne the tran we ticly saw in benghazi. >> now, "the newk time repoedhaotor.s. officis were surprised by secretary clinton's admission. her lking of alaeda linked groups t crisis in peaps, becauseat se id lat leadso a different conclusion. on thursday, secretary clinton said i quote, absolutely no information or reason to believe there is any basis to suggest that the u.s. ambassador was on an al-qaeda hit list. also perhaps because the president himself has not said terrorists were involved in the attacks. here he is on "the view" this week when asked if he thought it was a terrorist attack. >> there's no doubt that the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn't just a mob action. he to his press secretary to use the t word. carney, under pressure from reporters, cla
-qaeda. >> hiding in libya. >> it was actually in a high level united nations meeting that hillary clinton for the first timeoday admitted that an al-qaeda linked group was involved. >> for some time, al-qaeda in the islamic mog rab and other groups have launched attacks and kidnappings from northern mali into neighboring countries and are working with other violent extremists to undermine the transitions as we tragically saw in benghazi. >> now, "the new york times" reported that other senior u.s. officials were surprised by secretary clinton's admission. her linking of those al-qaeda linked groups to the crisis in benghazi. perhaps, because what she said late last week leads to a very different conclusion. on thursday, secretary clinton said i quote, absolutely no information or reason to believe there is any basis to suggest that the u.s. ambassador was on an al-qaeda hit list. also perhaps because the president himself has not said terrorists were involved in the attacks. here he is on "the view" this week when asked if he thought it was a terrorist attack. >> there's no doubt that the
'll get the killers. today the president spent 24 minutes of his half-hour speech to the united nations talking about libya, the middle east and ambassador chris stevens. the speech, which was seen by american voters and viewers around the world, mentioned stevens 12 times. as the president paid tribute to him right from the start. >> chris stevens loved his work. he took pride in the country he served, and he saw dignity in the people that he met. and two weeks ago, he traveled to benghazi to review plans to establish a new cultural center and modernize a hospital. that's when america's compound came under attack. >> that's the first we learned about exactly what stevens was doing in benghazi, a city the u.s. had been warned was not safe. and the president continued in his speech vowing to find the killers. >> the attacks on the civilians in benghazi were attacks on america. we are grateful for the assistance we received from the libyan government, and from the libyan people. there should be no doubt that we will be relentless in tracking down the killers and bringing them to justice.
in the world as the president laid out today in front of the united nations, rooted in american values, but that will not louis lambist jihadist terrorists to push us out of the region. >> so when you say you're confident in what is happening on the ground, let me put the question directly to you, then. why is that when cnn was in the consulate days after the horrible attack, they found that the -- the diary of ambassador stevens' thoughts and his fears. and not the u.s. investigators. why weren't they the ones who found something like that, which was -- was just lying there? >> that's an excellent question. we did not get briefed on the specifics of cnn's acquisition and use of the private diary of ambassador stevens. that wasn't one of the topics on which we were briefed. that does raise a real question about the appropriateness of the use of material from a private diary. but it does, as you put it, raise a question. if it was just actually lying out in the open, was there, in fact, appropriate efforts to secure the consulate? one of the larger points i hope watchers take into mind,
obligations. now, ahmadinejad's will address the united nations and the world in a speech on wednesday. that happens to be the holiest day on the jewish calendar. prime minister netanyahu will take the podium the day after and he has been aggressive on the need to stop iran's nuclear ambition. he says iran will be 90% to a bomb in six months. a bomb he says will hurt america. >> all the things you see now in these mobs storming the american embassy is what you'll see in a regime with atomic bombs. you can't have people have atomic bombs. >> so, what's causing this escalation? two words. the united states. specifically the election battle between these two men. either mitt romney or barack obama will be the one to decide on the war or peace question. prime minister netanyahu seems to be betting on romney. romney has known him for 35 years. he visited him on the campaign trail in israel. and i even saw one of mitt romney's books on netanyahu's study shelf in jer use lem. he even appears in a pro romney ad in florida. >> the fact is, that every day that passes, iran gets closer and closer
that our 193 member at the united nations, there's only one member, iran, that is openly calling for the destruction of another member. israel. there's only one member openly denying the holocaust. there's only one member of the united nations that is constantly, habitually instigating violence all over the world, from latin america, through north africa all the way to central asia and certainly in the middle east. for all those reasons and many more, the world simply cannot and should not tolerate the very notion of iran becoming nuclear. >> do you ever feel conflicted when you look at iran, it has a jewish member of parliament, there's been a series on the holocaust, television series that aired in iran. there is a small jewish community there. do you ever feel conflicted at all in that sometimes their actions in that way, don't appear to be anti-jewish. >> i don't think the world has an issue with the iranian people. i think the world has an issue with the ongoing threat posed by the iranian leadership. i think what they're doing is irresponsible and reckless in the first plac
and at that time, not told about the al-qaeda links. when hillary clinton speing at the units nations wednesday, implied an al-qaeda link we reported on, the state department later corrected her, saying she was speaking generally, not about the attack in benghazi. now, u.s. intelligence sources tell cnn tonight that in the immediate after math of the attack, they thought the attack might have been, their word, spontaneous. okay, this is going to be a crucial word to define. what exactly is immediate aftermath? because the white house and the state department stuck with the spontaneous version of events for eight days. >> we are very cautious about drawing any conclusions with regard to who the perpetrators were, what their motivations were, whether it was premedicated. >> this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack. >> based on the information we had at the time and have to this day, we, we do not have evidence that it was premeditated. >> all right. these same people apparently knew a terrorist attack was perpetrated by al-qaeda within 24 hours after the attack, so the lack of information s
teren't trying t bomb -- >> they're a little country with a lot of oil. a nation of 80 million people. almost 80 million people. it's had a tremendous amount of influence in lebanon, afghanistan and iraq and in some cases, our interests are actually mutual with the united states and iran, so i think it is an important country without -- i think they've had a problem for many, many years with the west. particularly with the united states. where they believe, whether it's true or not, but they believe that the u.s. is out to get them. out to destroy the regime and overthrow the regime. even this recent delisting of the opposition group that was in iraq, claim is another example of the u.s. only interested in changing the regime. we have many, many issues between the u.s. and iran over the 30 years, the nuclear age has gotten to the point now where we have harsh, harsh sanctions hurting the people, the economy, everyone. probably not the regime so much. >> not as tough as they should, at least fm our reporting. if you were really trying to shut things down. >> well, they're not that len
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)